IRS admits to targeting conservative groups during 2012 electiona. Apologizes

It just keeps getting worse...

"Officials at the Internal Revenue Service knew in June 2011 that their agents were targeting conservative groups for additional scrutiny on tax documents, an inspector general report expected to be released next week is expected to say. A congressional source familiar with the inquiry told CNN this on Saturday, confirming information first reported by the Associated Press."

Serious question:

If Obama called a press conference the night before the election and told the American people that he had the IRS unfairly target conservative groups and that he intentionally misled the nation by claiming that a terrorist attack was actually the result of a youtube video in order to fit the narrative that he decimated terrorism, would one single Democrat not have voted for him?

Their funding was concealed through multiple front organizations to conceal the fact that the major figures behind the Republican Party were behind the so-called independent Tea Party, so there was good reason to scrutinize their finances.

gimme my obamaphone wrote:

IRS official admits she is bad a math. Can't produce any examples of liberal groups being audited.

Obama retaliates against State Department whistleblowers.

This is far more aggregius than what happened at Watergate. Why has the press not held Emporer Obamas feet to the fire?

More right wing spin.

What happened at Watergate was an attempt to circumvent the election on a massive scale.

You probably don't know the history, so let me tell you.

The Republican's in the late 60's put together a team to defeat the Democrats. This team was specifically recruited, and tasked with using Dirty Tricks against the Democrats.

Their inside term for the Democrats was "the f*ckers," their inside name for their team of dirty trick/unlawful tactics? --The "Rat F*ckers."

It's all part of the historical record...Go Read It.

In this case, the targeting was done by low level staff. The situation was been corrected.

Now, on the other hand, if you are not doing anything wrong, it doesn't matter if you are audited; you're ready and prepared and clean as a whistle.

Let's talk about some right wing tactics...

Like pumping of millions of dollars into dirty trick campaigns, lies, robo-calls... etc. etc. etc.

Take a look at the 60's. Who was assassinated? Republicans or Democrats?

Think there was a coincidence there?

I'll bet you are just fine with what happened.

You're a hateful moron, and an idiot.

the asker of questions wrote:

Serious question:

If Obama called a press conference the night before the election and told the American people that he had the IRS unfairly target conservative groups and that he intentionally misled the nation by claiming that a terrorist attack was actually the result of a youtube video in order to fit the narrative that he decimated terrorism, would one single Democrat not have voted for him?

Of course.

Conservative PACs wrote:

Big Johnny, you wrote a lot of garbage. The IRS was create by Congress. The head of the IRS is selected by the Executive Branch, but the approval is made by the Senate.

IRS is part of the executive branch. If you don't know that or can't figure it out with google or wikipedia or something, then I don't know what else to tell ya. Good luck!

The function of the IRS is to execute laws which Congress has passed.

The Executive Branch does not pass laws.

I don't know what else to tell ya. Good luck!

The tea party is about not wanting to pay taxes, is it not? So why shouldn't the IRS pay special attention to them, on the grounds that they seem likely to not pay? The IRS was doing its job. Stupid issue.

Much worse is how poor people are more likely to be randomly audited than anyone else, even though they owe much less in taxes. That's not a smart way for the IRS to maximize its receipts.

Conservative PACs wrote:

The function of the IRS is to execute laws which Congress has passed.

Like you say, the IRS executes laws. Pay close attention to the word EXECUTE there, and that should give you a clue as to which branch it is under. Hint: it's not the legislative and not the judicial. You've basically got it.

Be honest with yourself, Dems. If you switched the words "Obama" for "[insert a Republican's name here]" and "Democrats" for "Republicans" in both of these stories, MSNBC would have blown up and every one of you would be going nuts right now.

guy over there wrote:

Be honest with yourself, Dems. If you switched the words "Obama" for "[insert a Republican's name here]" and "Democrats" for "Republicans" in both of these stories, MSNBC would have blown up and every one of you would be going nuts right now.

Of course. It was wrong no matter who did it.

Bad Wigins wrote:

The tea party is about not wanting to pay taxes, is it not? So why shouldn't the IRS pay special attention to them, on the grounds that they seem likely to not pay? The IRS was doing its job. Stupid issue.

Much worse is how poor people are more likely to be randomly audited than anyone else, even though they owe much less in taxes. That's not a smart way for the IRS to maximize its receipts.

What on earth does thinking taxes are too high have to do with being "specially" selected by the IRS? The Tea Party people have not refused to pay their taxes, nor have they ever been accused of that. Why can you not admit the IRS wrongly target a group? The IRS has already admitted to wrongdoing, so why defend improper behavior. Not to mention they illegally demanded a list of donors.

Your stat about poor people being more likely to be randomly audited - where did you pull that stat from because it is DEAD wrong. Here is the actual breakdown:

Income level Audit rate

No income reported: 3.4%

$1-25K 1.2%

25K-50K 0.7%

50K-75K 0.8%

75K-100K 0.8%

100-200K 1.0%

200K-500K 2.7%

500K - 1 million 5.3%

1-5 million 11.8%

5-10 million 20.8%

10 million and up 29.9%

Liberals/Leftists/Progressives/Democrats, whatever they wish to be called now, have become profoundly dishonest. No act by this administration is so despicable that it can't be defended or excused. This board is a perfect example.

What should have been easy for an intellectually honest believer in civic responsibility - "This is wrong, should be investigated thoroughly, those guilty should be punished and this situation should not happen again" - instead is filled with weaselly red herrings and an explanation of mitigating circumstances.

Is it so tough to understand that the IRS should never be used to intimidate or punish Americans politically?

^Liberals are evil. That's all one needs to know about them to understand them.

The tea party is about changing the tax code to pay less taxes. Everyone practices tax avoidance but by your logic groups that want higher taxes should be audited less because they want to pay?

Runner80206 wrote: The tea party is about changing the tax code to pay less taxes. Everyone practices tax avoidance but by your logic groups that want higher taxes should be audited less because they want to pay?

There are some legit tea party groups that should qualify as non-profits. They have to be advocacy-based and not politically-based. The problem is there are a lot of politically-based groups trying to pull a fast one on the IRS.

Bowing Alinsky wrote:

Liberals/Leftists/Progressives/Democrats, whatever they wish to be called now, have become profoundly dishonest. No act by this administration is so despicable that it can't be defended or excused. This board is a perfect example.

What should have been easy for an intellectually honest believer in civic responsibility - "This is wrong, should be investigated thoroughly, those guilty should be punished and this situation should not happen again" - instead is filled with weaselly red herrings and an explanation of mitigating circumstances.

Is it so tough to understand that the IRS should never be used to intimidate or punish Americans politically?

Don't kid yourself....there are apologists on both sides. Always have been. Neither party is immune.

Your 2nd and 3rd paragraphs are spot on.

Bowing Alinsky wrote:

Liberals/Leftists/Progressives/Democrats, whatever they wish to be called now, have become profoundly dishonest. No act by this administration is so despicable that it can't be defended or excused. This board is a perfect example.

What should have been easy for an intellectually honest believer in civic responsibility - "This is wrong, should be investigated thoroughly, those guilty should be punished and this situation should not happen again" - instead is filled with weaselly red herrings and an explanation of mitigating circumstances.

Is it so tough to understand that the IRS should never be used to intimidate or punish Americans politically?

Thanks for bringing this discussion back to where it belongs.

I worked years for a non-profit. We were small, but had significant funds pooled from many individual donors. Our accountant made sure that everything was done by the books, and our founder communicated to the entire staff the importance of complying with IRS rules in all of our fundraising efforts.

Even having done everything right, there was always the underlying fear that some small piece of paperwork had been forgotten or filled out incorrectly. The IRS dealing with us aggressively would have caused one hell of a headache in the organization, and any change in our good standing with them could have kept us from receiving grants we desperately needed to survive.

If the IRS was leaning on ANY organization with non-profit status illegally, then it is an outrage. I hope that the responsible parties lose their job in a very public way, and that the origin point of these directives to IRS agents is eventually exposed.

Drew G wrote:

the asker of questions wrote:

Serious question:

If Obama called a press conference the night before the election and told the American people that he had the IRS unfairly target conservative groups and that he intentionally misled the nation by claiming that a terrorist attack was actually the result of a youtube video in order to fit the narrative that he decimated terrorism, would one single Democrat not have voted for him?

Of course NOT.

Allow me to correct that. There you go, that's accurate.